Discussion in 'Architecture & Engineering' started by kmguru, Mar 3, 2008.
And the more money you'll need to buy all of this equipment. Then what if you never need it?:shrug:
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
I think it's a great idea.
As long as it's not abused and is used in such a way that people under its fire are able to get away from it. As for whoever said it, this thing is able to do things that other non-lethal weapons can't. It's long range and if properly used, doesn't cause injuries. It's instant! Speed of light. It fills a niche which is much needed to be filled.
It could also make a wonderful torture weapon. If properly used, it could inflict incredible pain to people without causing any lasting harm.
Of course it will be abused. Just look at Taser guns,... supposedly a non-lethal alternative to using a firearm, but end up getting used in situations to control people, where they otherwise would not have been fired upon with a live round.
It's known as 'function creep', and it is seen everywhere, so this device will get introduced with all the usual re-assurances, and then get deployed to break up crowds of peaceful demonstrators when the Police get bored and want to go home.
Well everything gets abused. Alcohol gets abused, cars are abused (not properly driven). Does that mean they should be banned?
These things will probably only be used by specially trained people. ADS is not like a taser. Have you seen the size of it? It's freakin' huge! Not to mention expensive. The armed forces won't let any idiot use it. The thing is expensive, and specialized, so it makes sense to only let expensive and specialized people operate it. Therefore, its abuse probably will be kept to a minimum. That's not to say that it won't happen, or that it shouldn't be a concern, however.
I think we can design a handheld device. All it is, is a very high frequency generator...with a tuned cavity emitter, one should be able to. Use the Li-ion power cell. You could get a few discharges before needing to replace the powerpack. Perhaps use a fuel cell with butane....just thinking aloud....
DAMIT, i wrote a whole responce to this but the window crashed.
I said the abuse that could come out of this system is MUCH worse than out of a tasa because it can be used to stop people protesting if the goverment so wishes. Of course first you need the goverment to do something that will pry the average american out of there couch but there is always the chance it will happen. Protests are an important feature of a democrasy (to the point where the victorian goverment purpose built federation square for various funtions but one was to be the end point of marches through the city). Yet a system like this one can undermine that and it could concivably do this from a hidden position so no one even knows its been used
Hey, we have Radar detectors for the police radar. So, suppose I manufacture (the technology is simple) those devices as a private company, I should be able to manufacture clothings (like a hijab?) that can protect you. Make money both ways....that is the American way! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Apples to oranges. A taser isn't a crowd control device. ADS is. You could make the exact same arguments for any method of crowd control.
i know a taser isnt a crowd control device (i was making the point that the most specilised the equiptment the more specilised the abuse) but there is one difference between using something like this and using a fire truck or a line of cops in riot gear. This is that when it apears on the news its really EASY to see the abuse by the cops in riot gear or the hose on a fire truck. This wont be as ovious which makes it MUCH more dangorous to the political prossess
I'm pretty sure people would notice an angry mob turning tail and running away screaming in pain at the touch of a button.
you dont think it could be used while the crowd is small from behind some bushes or inside a building to stop a rally for political rather than public safty reasons?
you are much more trusting than i am then. I want whatever means the police and goverment have to do to quell public "disorder" to be VERY public so that they have to stand up and say "yes we used it and this is why" to easy for something like this to hypothetically be set up in fed square (or out the front of the libary) and turned on before the protest starts so that protesters cant gather at all
I'm not necessarily more trusting of the government, I just think that if this thing were used in a gratuitous manner like you're describing its effects would be so dramatic it would be impossible to cover up, making any attempt to do so irrelevant.
one thing i do have to wonder is why (especially in the US, not so much here) the police seem to be taught that the best way to deal with a protest is to atack it at all. You have LARGE numbers of people marching in one direction with there emotions hightend simply because they are mad enough about SOMETHING to march on the streets so the police either stand across the road and try to block them or they employ something like this. Surly the best way for the police to deal with it would be just to block the roads, divert trafic and let it happen
The whole reason fed square is designed so well is that Swanson street is a walk ANYWAY (so there are only taxis and emergency services alowed to drive along it) and so the ONLY intersection that has to be blocked is the corner of flinders and swanson street which doesnt overly inconveniance drivers. I would have to look up the exact figures of the anti war protest but say 50 000 as a guess marched against the war in iraq and there were no arests i can recall. The whole thing turned into a party at the fed square end because Peter Garrot (head of midnight oil and now enviroment minister) put on a concert at the end. Compare this to the batton charge when Kenert closed the school (sorry cant rember which school it was) which was a reltivly small protest but ended up with HEEPS of arests and injuries because the police got aggressive
I just dont get it
The one problem with such crowd control is identifying what comprises a crowd.
Lets say for instance a Foreign Diplomat was employed into the crowd, an attack on the Diplomat could create a sudden down-spiral of relations with that country into a "Mexican Stand-off" with the threats of various weapons being deployed in "Retaliation" for the attack on Diplomacy.
I could see that if such equipment was deployed on crowds at home or in the field it would result in various Human Rights Organisations utilising their connections with Politicians to place Diplomat's into 'Angry crowd' environments just to undermine the systems ability for use.
Well, If you don't think putting your pets into the microwave oven to dry them off is wrong.Then you would think this type of system is ok, I myself think beam weapons should be ban by all countries, Just look at what has been written about Russia's Scalar weapons and you might agree,one shot from there scalar hand held weapons will kill any living creature instantly.the idea behind the active denial system is to allow one man to hold off virtually a whole army, what more could the NWO ask for, the elite want a few to control the whole planet, and what better way to do it, than to have systems like this in place.I imagine they are working to place these units in space,so that there will be no safe place on the planet to hide if they do get the chance to take over,and unless we come up with a good defence against it,you will soon find it being used on us. Oh that is right, they all ready have used it on Americans protesting by the capital,it dispersed the crowd in a hurry,and we know from the past ( Kent State) that there not beyond using this thing at full power if we the people decided that we didn't like what our government was doing.The best thing, we as people could do, would be to ask our Physics students what the heck there thinking about when they develop this kind of weapon,Most of them don't know that when they develop this stuff , Like at MIT, that its the military, who is paying for most of the stuff that there developing, and that there is a good chance that if its worthwhile it will never make it to the public. The military will list it as top secret,and as long as stuff like this is developed there will never be peace on the planet. What general wants to loose his job because there isn't a war, not one! They will always find a way to start a war,(9-11 might be a good example) I don't think anyone that has done any research can deny that something fishy went on,example building 7 Anyone that knows anything about explosives knows that it takes weeks to set up a building to Implode and this building was dropped 20 minutes after the towers. It wasn't that long ago, that a story came out on Rense.com that told about a beam weapon mounted on a tank over in iraq that turned a full size bus into a blob of metal the size of a vw,and cooked full grown men down to the size of a baby. crispy critters. Just one persons opinion here, so take if for what its worth.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Don't they actually trap protesters then order them to clear the area?
Separate names with a comma.